Dragon Warriors

A discussion forum for the Dragon Warriors RPG and related works
It is currently Sun Nov 29, 2020 1:04 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:47 am 
Offline
10th Rank
10th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:17 pm
Posts: 1715
Profession: Barbarian
Yeah, as the rules stand, you can make a quick judgement based on ability scores rather than having to roll. Although I can barely visualize how a 'reflex 18' person can clamber up a smooth tree with few grips, I won't argue with it.


Perhaps another 'action' should be created. Grabbing, grappling, biting. Say a player clambers up a tree, then the bear bites. Guess a successful strike will probably do next to no damage. Not covered in the original books and I haven't looked at the new stuff long enough to see whether there is a quick and easy way to resolve it.

Also some rules for charging attacks would be nice. I think adnd 1ed called this 'overbearing' attacks....

_________________
Speech!





And so the show begins!!!
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dwp ... ssages/640


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:01 am 
Offline
7th Rank
7th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:01 am
Posts: 320
Location: Albion
Profession: Priest
Quote:
Although I can barely visualize how a 'reflex 18' person can clamber up a smooth tree with few grips, I won't argue with it.

Seems fair - the characters are supposed to be "heroes", after all... It's all part of their heroic abilities! :lol:

Quote:
Grabbing, grappling, biting.

Grappling (and suchlike) is not covered in the DW rules. I devised some rules for my own games, but they're a little complicated. In fairness, I find grappling rules in most games complicated...
...as a result, I use this kind of combat sparingly (i.e. when the story requires it).

Quote:
Also some rules for charging attacks would be nice.

Yes, especially for mounted characters. A bonus to armour by-pass and/or damage, perhaps?
(Again, I devised my own rules for this... but they probably need revising.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:08 am 
Offline
10th Rank
10th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:17 pm
Posts: 1715
Profession: Barbarian
Starkad wrote:
Quote:
what about disengaging combat by jumping off a cliff?

I think that's the easy part - it's the landing that's tricky. (Q.v. fallling rules, DW book 1, page 66)


About this, would the enemy get a free strike roll? he hasn't turned and run, he just retreated into what might be a drop, which might just be 6m for an Assassin.

Also what if you're facing 3 opponents who all flee? 3 free attacks?

_________________
Speech!





And so the show begins!!!
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dwp ... ssages/640


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:16 am 
Offline
7th Rank
7th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:01 am
Posts: 320
Location: Albion
Profession: Priest
Quote:
About this, would the enemy get a free strike roll? he hasn't turned and run, he just retreated into what might be a drop, which might just be 6m for an Assassin.

If he has retreated over the edge (rather than turned and run) then there isn't a free strike. That would be a good way for an Assassin to get away.

If he "flees" over such an edge, then it's upto the GM. You could
a) apply the free strike rule as normal,
b) have the attackers make a Reflexes check to see if they strike before the character falls, or
c) apply EVASION? Someone (I can't remember who) suggested using EVASION as a means of ducking out of combat and this might be one such use...

Quote:
Also what if you're facing 3 opponents who all flee? 3 free attacks?

I'd say no. You only get one free attack (in one Combat Round), but you do get to pick who you strike at.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:28 am 
Offline
10th Rank
10th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:17 pm
Posts: 1715
Profession: Barbarian
Starkad wrote:

c) apply EVASION? Someone (I can't remember who) suggested using EVASION as a means of ducking out of combat and this might be one such use...



This is my idea. I figure that barbarians and assassins should be good at disengaging. In another system it would be considered a dodge move. I'd say the difference is that the person is not using his weapon and added reach to minimize damage but purely evading. Evading a sword blow is pretty much the same as dodging FIRESTORMS, siege weapons, falling boulders and flying heads coming in your direction.

_________________
Speech!





And so the show begins!!!
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dwp ... ssages/640


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:00 am 
Offline
7th Rank
7th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:01 am
Posts: 320
Location: Albion
Profession: Priest
Quote:
You only get one free attack (in one Combat Round)

I worded that badly. I should have said you only get one attack per Combat Round* (and you can choose whether to attack a fleeing opponent, or one who's still fighting)...
* Unless using a Main Gauche.

Quote:
In another system it would be considered a dodge move.

Your idea? Cool. :)

I think what you'd be getting at is something between a "fighting withdrawal" (where one combatant simply retreats and gets their normal DEFENCE) and "flee" (where one turns and runs and presents 0 DEFENCE against a strike)?

Instead of the panicked turn ("flee"), the combatant makes a calculated leap/dodge to put themselves out of reach... You might call that an "evade" manoeuvre which, if successful, allows them to safely turn and run in the next Combat Round. In such a circumstance, it might make sense to pit EVASION against ATTACK.
(It might be up to the GM to determine if "evade" is possible. In the press of a mélée there might be no room for such ducking and weaving.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:00 pm 
Offline
7th Rank
7th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 9:25 pm
Posts: 445
Profession: Sorcerer
If a regular retreat gives full Defence (but not Attack, presumably because moving backwards takes more concentration than moving forwards) but quarter movement rate, and rout gives no Defence but full movement rate, I think you should be able to do an "emergency withdrawal" with half Defence and half normal movement rate.

Cheers,

-Kyle


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:10 am 
Offline
7th Rank
7th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:01 am
Posts: 320
Location: Albion
Profession: Priest
Quote:
If a regular retreat gives full Defence (but not Attack, presumably...

The way I interpret it, a regular retreat is simply a "fighting withdrawal" - you can continue to strike back as you withdraw. The DW rules are quiet on this point: DW1, pg.41 "the retreating character, still defending normally"...
(Of course, if the terrain is difficult, a GM could rule that retreating impedes the character's ability to strike back.)

Personally, I have fought back quite effectively when retreating.* I would expect a trained fighter (or one with at least rudimentary combat skills) to be able to do the same. All it takes is a momentary stop, a strike, then resume the move.
* Yes, moving forward tends to be better... But sometimes the situation demands it.

Quote:
I think you should be able to do an "emergency withdrawal" with half Defence and half normal movement rate.

Possibly. To avoid added complication, I probably wouldn't... But I can see why a GM might allow it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:30 am 
Offline
10th Rank
10th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:17 pm
Posts: 1715
Profession: Barbarian
WodenKrait wrote:
If a regular retreat gives full Defence (but not Attack, presumably because moving backwards takes more concentration than moving forwards) but quarter movement rate, and rout gives no Defence but full movement rate, I think you should be able to do an "emergency withdrawal" with half Defence and half normal movement rate.

Cheers,

-Kyle




Might work. We already have a system of split defence for multiple combatants, don't see why we can't have a 'reduced ATTACK/DEFENCE' system for moving in combat. Seems complex, and perhaps unnecessarily so as you try to scale ATTACK/DEFENCE scores with degree of movement. But that works, say for elves and halflings who have a faster run rate. Might even be a basis for some 'skirmisher' profession who's role is related to getting in and out of engagements. I'd love to see work on that rather than more marvel superhero powers like 'rope cutting with slings' or ... well, maybe a bonus to dodging...

_________________
Speech!





And so the show begins!!!
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dwp ... ssages/640


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 1:36 am 
Offline
7th Rank
7th Rank
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 9:25 pm
Posts: 445
Profession: Sorcerer
Starkad wrote:
Seems complex, and perhaps unnecessarily so as you try to scale ATTACK/DEFENCE scores with degree of movement.


Yeah I wouldn't argue for that level of granularity. I think:

Rout: Attack/Defence=0, movement full
Withdrawal: Defence=halved, movement halved
Retreat: Defence=full, movement quartered

Is pretty easy to remember though, even if it isn't as symmetrical as my quasi-OCD would like (Rout should give 1/4 Attack and Defence, right?).

Whether Attack is possible for withdrawal or retreat is another matter.

Cheers,

-Kyle


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group